IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 10 March 2011
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100022192
THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:
1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).
2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests to be awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) and the Army Achievement Medal (AAM) and that these awards be added to his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).
2. The applicant states he thought a Soldier was to be awarded the AGCM after 3 years of active service and he has 3 years of active service and 4 years of Army National Guard service. The AAM was pinned on his uniform in a ceremony in Germany.
3. The applicant does not provide any additional evidence.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. The applicant's military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 April 1986, was awarded the military occupational specialty of combat signaler, and was promoted to pay grade E-4.
3. On 13 April 1988, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for:
a. violating a general regulation by wrongfully operating a privately-owned vehicle without possessing a valid U.S. Army Europe (AE) Form 190-IF (Private Operators License/The United States Forces in Germany);
b. with intent to deceive, making an official sworn statement to a captain which was false and known to him to be false;
c. wrongfully appropriating a passenger car of a value greater than $100.00; and
d. while driving the vehicle at the time of an accident and having knowledge of the accident, wrongfully leaving the scene of the accident without making his identity known.
4. The punishment imposed included a reduction to pay grade E-2. However, reduction in excess of reduction to the grade of E-3 was suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 10 October 1988.
5. Accordingly, the applicant was reduced from pay grade E-4 to pay grade E-3 effective 13 April 1988.
6. On 24 August 1988, the applicant was reduced from pay grade E-3 to pay grade E-2. The records do not contain documents which show the reason for the reduction.
7. On 25 August 1988, the applicant was given an administrative letter of reprimand for being apprehended for drunk driving with a blood alcohol content of .17 percent on 16 August 1988.
8. On 28 September 1989, the applicant was honorably released from active duty. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he was awarded the Army Service Ribbon, Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar, and Overseas Service Ribbon.
9. The applicant's records do not contain orders for the AAM or AGCM.
10. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the AGCM is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency, and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service. This period is 3 years except in those cases when the period for the first award ends with the termination of a period of Federal military service. A record of punishment is not automatically disqualifying. Although there is no automatic entitlement to the AGCM, disqualification must be justified. Current practice requires that the commander provide written notice of nonfavorable consideration and permits the individual to respond.
11. Army Regulation 600-8-22 also provides that the AAM is awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving in a noncombat area on or after 1 August 1981, distinguished themselves by meritorious service or achievement.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. While there is no record of the applicant being disqualified for the AGCM, he took a car without the permission or knowledge of the owner, he drove the car without a military European driver's license in violation of a general regulation, he was in an accident while driving the appropriated car, he left the scene of the accident, and then he made a false sworn statement to an officer regarding the accident. Later, he was apprehended for driving while intoxicated, which appears to have resulted in the suspension of his reduction from pay grade E-3 to E-2 being vacated.
2. Based on the multiple offenses committed by the applicant, it is reasonable to presume he was disqualified for the AGCM, but the disqualification was not included in his records.
3. As for the AAM, there is no evidence the applicant was awarded the AAM. As such, there is insufficient evidence on which to add the AAM to his DD Form 214.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
____X___ ___X____ ___X____ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
____________X_____________
CHAIRPERSON
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100022192
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100022192
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100022413
Applicant Name: ????? On 22 September 2008, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707398C070209
Member The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 12 October 1993 the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial of reckless driving and violation of two general regulations, i.e, consuming alcohol within 6 hours of a vehicle accident and failing to immediately notify military or civilian police of an accident. ________SIGNED________ CHAIRPERSON SFMR-RBR S: 22 March 1999 15 January 1999 MEMORANDUM FOR...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707398
Member The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Army on 18 November 1981 for 3 years. On 12 October 1993 the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial of reckless driving and violation of two general regulations, i.e, consuming alcohol within 6 hours of a vehicle accident and failing to immediately notify military or civilian police of an accident.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 04100060C070208
Counsel states that another witness, SSG V, was interviewed but that the line of duty investigating officer “only touched on the issue of the gold sedan when he interviewed” SSG V. He notes that in SSG V’s sworn statement he related that he was told by Mr. F at the scene of the accident about the involvement of the “gold sedan” in this motor vehicle accident, and thereby corroborated Mr. F’s statement regarding the fact that the woman in the gold car “was speeding so he [applicant] wouldn’t...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011523
The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. The applicant states he was having problems with alcohol during his time in the service. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
She provides medical records that she believes indicate her ex-husband was treated for injuries consistent with a driver of an automobile in a head-on collision. The records also indicate that the injuries were sustained in a motor vehicle accident and that he was the possible driver. Also, in a Social Work Service report from applicant’s medical records, dated 31 January 1996, a social worker noted: “MVA [Motor Vehicle Accident] New Year’s Eve was patient’s 3rd DWI [Driving While...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005816
On 2 June 1992, a Line of Duty Investigation Officer was appointed to determine whether any misconduct or any negligence on the part of the applicant was the cause of the injuries he sustained in a motor vehicle accident on 3 May 1992. However, there is no evidence, neither of record or provided by the applicant, that he submitted an appeal. A review of the applicant's OMPF revealed that the Not in Line of Duty Due to Own Misconduct determination and the Letter of Reprimand are filed in...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080014132
On 10 December 2007, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080018628
Applicant Name: ????? On 29 April 2008, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100017024
The applicants, the parents of a deceased former service member (FSM), request correction of the FSM's record to show: * on the DD Form 261 (Report of Investigation - Line of Duty and Misconduct Status), dated 11 March 2009, the FSM's death was "in line of duty" instead of "not in line of duty - due to own misconduct" * The FSM's promotion to first lieutenant (1LT), effective 26 November 2008 2. The IO's approved findings of the LOD investigation show a finding of "Not in the Line of Duty -...